NCAA Approves Scholarship Increases and Multiyear Grants for Athletes

All good points, and good moral logic for the conclusion. Still, I would tweak it for myself thus:

- as one who brings a lot of outside creds and experience to the job, I haven’t been restricted to the canned curriculum you mention. The textbooks for my humanities courses are as good as anywhere else for first-year college, and the writing courses are structured with conventional exercises too; and while I am given a fixed curriculum of work, I’m free to add to it and flex it around to suit my additions, which I do. It’s always felt like a platform saving me from doing basic grunt work I’d have done much the same anyway, and supporting the more unique dishes I bring to the table;

- in 5 years of teaching for U of Phx’s Axia online (the 2-year AA equivalent) I’ve never had the experience of being controlled or ominously supervised; indeed, the experience has been more of deference and respect, even when I’ve had clashes with students about plagiarism, reasons for poor performance, etc. Good support;

- the “minimal rigor” and “level of student ability” you mention may not apply to my courses in the same way as to professional programs where the kinds of basic skills I teach are presumed. I taught similar first-year writing and comp courses at Rutgers, which has both an excellent such program and open admissions, being a State-run school; the latter feature meant that I had a cross section of students much like I get now online, ranging from rubber-stamp A to impossible F levels, with every possible degree in between.

Part of how I “teach” the latter group includes doing exactly what you say you can’t do, and so must walk away from: telling them in no uncertain terms just how dire their deficiencies in basic skills are, and what they must do about that if they are to have any hope of getting anywhere as students at all. Again, same as I did at Rutgers, which routinely failed a quarter to a third of their Writing Program students in their first run at their classes, forcing them to take retake them one or more times before they could go on, which is also common at U of Phx.

Bottom line for me is that the exchange possible between me and my students is not a guarantee of a job, or of respect they do or don’t get from potential employers for whatever grades or degrees they get; it’s a chance to acquire the skills and knowledge themselves, in the midst of a less-than-perfect context, as cards they can then play as best they can, wherever they can get to. That’s how I got myself beyond my own less-than-humble beginnings to my more-than-exalted current state in, again, this robber-baron’s den of an American nightmare, and that’s what’s possible for some–not all, but for which ones is up for grabs, from where I sit; you just can’t tell.

Solzhenitsyn wrote in one of his books (I forget which) about his experience teaching young Russians how to read and write in some poverty-bound school, back in the Soviet times, after his lionization for his books and while he was still working and living as a dissident under the oppressive suspicion of the state. Different world, different characters…I find myself recalling the sense and feel of his words about all that, if not the details, regularly in my job. He gave them neither false hope nor despair about their situation, just truth, care, love, respect, and whatever he had to offer such youth as the elder he was in the boat they were all in.

You forgot to mention that the faculty are managed by people who could moonlight as beat cops, or private investigators, not academics. The system is extraordinarily flawed in that for someone who is poorly prepared, but wants badly to do a good job, they are still stuck in a system where collaboration is discouraged, their superiors are often LESS prepared academically and the students need the most support.

This is easy to hide from accreditors, though. Only the show horses are brought out when they come, and the rest of the crowd hides in the barn.

Jim Fleckenstein, a former Kaplan Program Director at the Modesto, CA campus reports otherwise:

http://www.modestocj.com/

That’s fine. I have different experiences than Jim. But, thanks for the different perspective.

I apologize forprofited. It appears that my last reply was posted as a new post (instead of a reply).

Most reputable institutions limit the number of their own graduates hired to teach at said institutions but this is not so in the for-profits, especially on the doctoral level. This information is typically hidden from the public however.

Thank you Student_Advocate2. This party is far from over!!!!!!

“I have seen too many “UoP” grads teaching in the “UoP” programs, without requisite career experience to supplement, and this is what I would classify as a major issue/problem.”

Thank you for this comment lizziec. This is true not just on the undergraduate level but also at the graduate, professional level where the impact on the work performed by graduates can be very serious, even dangerous.

Take a look at http://tampastudents.net, Imagine page. These experiences are said be those expressed by students to the web creator. I can’t imagine the impact of poor training and assessment by doctor of psychology faculty in this field. Graduates of this school will eventually treat mentally ill patients!

The sad thing here is that these ‘facts’ have been personally verified but I am not at liberty to divulge my sources. Imagine traing and evuating child psychologists by someone not trained him/herself in this specialty. I woudn’t send my child to such a graduate clinical psychologist!

You know, lizziec, commentary threads like this–any conversation, really–are an acquired taste. It’s a game of “I’ll see your anecdote and point with mine and raise it an insult.” You win, I’m delusional…nicely played.

No George, I’m not giving you names. You’re going to have to take my word for it, OR get a teaching gig at one of these places and see for yourself.

The only thing I see going on at these places that is “extensive” is the rape and pillage of Pell Grant and student loan monies, as well as the students’ futures.

The only people with the “extensive teaching backgrounds” are the adjuncts from the other side of the tracks (i.e. traditional higher ed institutions)

For those interested in another perspective on for-profits, here’s an article from Footnotes, a publication of the American Sociological Association (January 2011)

http://www.asanet.org/footnotes/jan11/forprofit_0111.html

- deleted by author -

I really hate it when people correct one’s grammar and spelling.  It is not a frickin dissertation.  It is a hastily written blog. 

You may be troubled by the idea that even native speakers find English grammar challenging, but wouldn’t the evidence suggest this is exactly the case?

I clicked on this article only because I am a true fan of practical, get it done communications. I wanted to see an example of something that worked. Your letter, Mr. Sweeney, is terrific. I immediately saw four things in it that I loved: it is brief, it has lots of “white space”, it sticks to one simple message (versus a laundry list / let’s throw everything up on the wall and see what sticks) and best of all, you repeated your key point three times and at a terrific place; the last line of each paragraph. There are some posters here who are obviously jealous of your success. Forget them.  You obviously know a thing or to about marketing, not to mention clear, simple communications. Congratulations on your new tenure track position.

Many of these academic reforms (more core high school core courses completed before senior year, increased gpa/SAT sliding scale, move from a 2.0 to 2.5 gpa for transfers to 4 year schools, direct penalties for coaches) make good sense academically but in light of fact that just two days ago the NCAA published some pretty positive graduation data, I  am not sure this increased focus on academics is the solution to college sports problems. The “scandals,” such as they are, are not found in the academic side of the equation, yes, of course they happen but that is not the systemic problem with athletics, “cheating” in college is far from limited to student-athletes. Student-athletes are the only subset of college students who have their college behavior reported on in the news. Do not confuse that with the idea that student-athletes are a biger problem. I already hear the screams of the haters out there yelling about not making apologies for student-athletes.But take time out from assuming you are right and look at the evidence, over 60% of all college students admit to cheating so that particular scandal is endemic to every high school and college. To me, these academic reforms appear aimed at diverting attention from the real controversy in college sports, how to reconcile the dollars with the educational mission. Throwing a couple of grand at student-athletes to cover full cost of attendance is not going to satisfy the student-athletes and will only serve to piss off faculty and other students. The NCAA does not control much in terms of the media money (except for the March Madnes contract) and that is the problem, they are trying to control a system they ultimately have little control over. So, they can nickel and dime their way through a PR jungle with academic reform but the anti-trust controversy is the battle the NCAA is truly running from with this smoke and mirrors charade. The media dollars are the root of all the problems, the NCAA  and all sport haters need to spend way more time identifyiing and policing the greedy adults and leave the students alone.Participating in college sports is a legitimate and valuable learning experience that can aid personal growth and development. To those who think otherwise I can state with close to 99% accuracy that they are basing their opinions on absolutely no direct and substantive personal experience working with student-athletes. If they did, they would not be so quick to think they have it all figured out. But the less you know, the easier it is to believe you are right, so I look forward to more frothing indignation from contributors to this forum. 

I agree completely, It is true that the many of the key “impact” players in men’s basketball and football are either under-prepared, African-American or both. Averages hide some of the continued disparities in graduation rates. With new NCAA legislation, Athletic Depts will need to hire more learning specialists not less. These reforms announced yesterday barely change anything for the better and on the flip side will exclude more minority students from entering college. The NCAA in its infinite self-serving cynicism does not mention the fact these reforms are going to hit the most disadvantaged and vulnerable students. Just watch diversity rates drop on D-I campuses as the NCAA not only profits off the backs of young black males but now will increasingly keep them out of college altogether. Way to go Mark Emmert! But look behind you Mr. Emmert, the anti-trust train is barreling down the tracks and is going to make life a living hell for you  and your friends in Indiannapolis. I would prefer to see the NCAA disbanded, they are a shadow government with no real authority and appear to make a living off off enforcing an incomprehensible rule book and the use of threats and intimidation. So many of their rules actually hurt the hardest working and most academically ambitious of student-athletes. Conferences don’t need the NCAA to make media contracts and nor do they need the NCAA to deregulate the bloated carcass that is the current rule book, they can do that on their own.  I don’t know how this will shake out eventually, paying college athlees will destroy what is good about college sports, continuing the status quo will only mean more money for the greedy adults currently lapping at the financial salt lick of televised college sports. We could go back to the days of the college “game of the week” and instead of having 60 games on every weekend only allow one. I could also ride a pogo stick to Mars, same chance of working.

Ron Suskind’s recently published book, Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President, as well as earlier documentaries about America’s financial crises point to another looming crisis in higher education that mirrors the economic meltdowns. Here’s the story.  

Suskind, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist,  provides deep insights into the principal players in a calamitous affair—how Wall Street strayed from long-standing principles of transparency, accountability, and fair dealing to generate stunning profits but only to fail just prior to the 2008 election to the presidency of a woefully inexperienced manager.  

Suskind’s revelations should come as no surprise to those who have viewed the documentaries “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room” that provides a behind-the-scenes look at the powerful energy company whose downfall forever changed the landscape of the business world and “Inside Job” that reveals the true architects of the economic meltdown that hit America starting in 2008—exposing most of the same players named by Suskind.  

Taken together, Suskind’s book and the documentaries provide a telling lesson in the potential trappings of arrogance, dishonesty, incompetence (inexperience), greed, and unethical behavior plaguing, to varying degrees,  not only corporate America, but our government as well. We see that a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center’s twin towers,  grievous harm to the U. S. and world economies has been achieved by Americans—such harm was one of the key objectives of the 9/11 attack that failed in this regard. Devastating economic harm was not accomplished by a memorable catastrophic event, but over time via a combination of greed and arrogance, as well as a profound lack of appropriate regulation and oversight by U. S. governments led by ill-advised presidents who, in turn, exercised poor judgment.  

Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were held accountable for the 9/11 attack and duly punished. However, no one has been sent to jail or otherwise held accountable for the economic crisis orchestrated by the confidence men who served on Wall Street and in the federal government.

Unfortunately, another unheralded crisis is brewing—mirroring the economic debacles in many ways.  It involves one of America’s biggest business sectors—higher education. Many of America’s colleges and universities are experiencing serious financial problems as well as troubles with proliferating scandals in their professional sports entertainment businesses that are led by their own brand of confidence men—officials at the NCAA cartel (NCAA and its member institutions) and conferences, as well as wealthy boosters and trustees.  

The schools have become academically adrift in a sea of sports—with graduates that have not developed the skills and knowledge they need to become our next generation of leaders and good citizens. Their graduates lack foundational knowledge in core subjects such as math, science & technology, economics, communications (written and verbal), civics, and history.  

The schools’ crowd-pleasing sports-entertainment businesses exhibit undisguised contempt of academic integrity and are not only accompanied by injustices to college athletes, but massive corruption as well. Corruption has, over time, warped academic missions as athletics have been prioritized over academics with dire unintended consequences, to wit: the loss of economic competitiveness, deterioration of America’s well being, as well as the erosion of its leadership position on the world stage.  

Today, there is no meaningful oversight of the NCAA cartel as it is not only self-reporting and self-regulating, but self-enforcing as well. Furthermore, the cheating and corruption that enables the cartel to maintain its tax-exempt status—while fielding professional teams with their conferences serving as the minor leagues for the NFL and NBA—are rooted in the same types of cronyism and cozy relationships that were instrumental in bringing about today’s financial crises   

Notwithstanding the NCAA Board’s recent approval of tougher academic rules and announcements such as reported by Sander and others, serious questions remain about the willingness and ability of the NCAA cartel and conference officials to reform their operations. The reason is simply that these officials have conflicting interests as promoters of their professional sports businesses and enforcers of rules that can curtail the viability of these businesses.  

Nonetheless, as with AIG and the big banks, government officials consider these businesses too big to fail and too popular with constituents (a political ‘third rail’). As a consequence, they are reluctant to require corrective action, such as imposing requirements for transparency, accountability and oversight that would not only assure compliance with federal conditions for the cartel’s tax-exempt status, but expose its secretive operations to disinfecting sunshine as well.

Recent calls for congressional action by Congressmen Bobby Rush (D, IL) and John Conyers (D, MI) to address the proliferation of scandals in collegiate athletics may lead to an exception to this general rule.

Sadly, the nation stands in denial.  There is no one to blame but ourselves with our addiction to 24/7 sports entertainment and tolerance of a political class that seemingly prioritizes re-election above all else. When will we ever earn?  

Perhaps much of this will be the subject of a future Suskind book and truth-telling documentaries, possibly co-authored with fellow Pulitzer-Prize-winner Taylor Branch, author of the cover story, “The Shame of College Sports,” in the October 2011, issue of The Atlantic Monthly. Hopefully, the book and documentaries will not be histories of another calamitous affair, but rather a story about how we are going about resolving related problems to come back as the world leader we once were.

Frank G. Splitt is a former McCormick Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science.

Universities should not be franchised.

Expading the school outside the state will dilute the quality of education. If foriegn students are interested in the school, then let them enroll in the US. If US students want to participate in study abroad programs, then let the school work with a local and certified college.

This has been a big issue for Australian colleges and universities.  Since at least 2000 the federal government has operated a register for institutions that teach international students on shore.  Basically, the federal government wont issue a visa to a student unless they have an offer of enrolment (which is normally recorded electronically on the immigration department’s database) in a program and institution registered by the feds.

Almost since its inception in 2000 the separate Australian federal quality assurance body for universities has scrutinised off shore programs closely, almost always inspecting off shore teaching sites (at the university’s expense!).

Nonetheless, international education warrants institutions’ vigilance, as the authors argue.  

Over my 30 some years in administering international programs at both public and private institutions of higher education I have come across shocking cases of deceit and deception.  Unfortunately, where big money is involved the response to inquiries is often an unspoken “We’d rather not know.”  The folks running the programs at Dickinson State and Empire State must be amateurs. 

The post by Lane and Kinser notes that institutions are responsible to assure their own quality.  And that is just what Empire State College does.
Our program in Tirana, which enrolls about 110 students per year, is overseen by a regional coordinator based on Prague and a full-time coordinator on-site in Tirana.  The regional coordinator, formerly a full-time, tenured faculty member and associate dean at a college center in New York, visits the Tirana program once a term with a team of New York based senior faculty, and at other times as needed.  The team meets with students to help them with degree plans, advise on course selection, observe classroom instruction, meet with local faculty and provide faculty development programs.  The team visit also provides an opportunity for the faculty of both institutions to collaborate on course and program development.  The regional coordinator reviews and approves faculty who teach Empire State College courses. 
The international programs office at Empire State College’s administrative headquarters in Saratoga Springs NY provides further academic oversight.  A faculty curriculum committee reviews and, if appropriate, approves all courses and curriculum, for Tirana and any other international program.  Each student – in the Tirana program and any other Empire State College program – prepares a degree plan and a rationale to justify the selected studies.  An assessment committee of faculty reviews these documents for quality and conformity to academic policy.  There is a second review of the student’s academic record in the graduation approval process. 
The students, the faculty in Tirana and the leadership of the partner college are well-known to us.  The program is not something that we pack up in a box and ship overseas; we have full-time staff in daily communication with Tirana students.  None of this is a secret. 
Marjorie W. Lavin, vice provost, Empire State College

While I support providing the opportunity of an education to anybody who wants it; I must say that instances such as this creates a very negative connotation to any internationalization.  Would an international education society be a good start to overseeing such campuses?